what kind of society are we?

[barbu1977]

How are we going to work? What are you guys in for?

Democracy sociaty where we elect different position like
President,
Minister of foreing affairs,
Turnplayer,
Minister of interior

Those take action and polls others oppinion.

or

An anarchic society, where everybody takes care of what's to be done and does it when available. (like untill now)

 

[barbu1977]

I think that with 10 players, both can be played nicely (with 20 player, democracy is definitly the place to go).

But since not everybody in the groop knows the others, a democracy may be better to start with.

 

[Whomp]

I lean towards anarchist. Most of us are used to a SG style.

My thoughts is everyone is president.

IMO the only position we really need is a Foreign Minister (or Master of Spin). I think Bede is a great wordsmith and I think most would agree he would be great at this job.

Turnplayer--I think if we match up Europeans with North Americans we can make sure the save is played. Maybe taking turns with tandems of players.

Minister of Interior--This might be a good idea to make sure we are MMing properly.

Barbu what worked best at CDZ?

 

[Tubby Rower]

I voted Anarchy just because a lot of us are SG'ers. The whole turn-off of DG's for me is the fact that everything is polled including no-brainer stuff.

If we do Anarchy, then I'd suggest someone posting the SG general rules that we play by.

If we do Democracy, then I'd suggest someone posting how that works (because I still don't know).

BTW, if we really want to confuse the opposition, then get soul_warrior to be the Foreign Minister. I doubt the other teams have anyone that speaks jive.

 

[IroquoisPlisken]

SW as the Foreign Minister. Sounds like an international incident waiting to happen.

I'm used to SGs, so that's what I'd prefer. Besides, I thought I read somewhere that we'd have just 24 hours to play our turn. Would we have time to poll everything and play the turn?

 

[barbu1977]

I'm used to SGs, so that's what I'd prefer. Besides, I thought I read somewhere that we'd have just 24 hours to play our turn. Would we have time to poll everything and play the turn?

The turn should normaly be agreed before it comes in regardless of the way we are going to play. Exceptions could happen, like a stack of unwanted units.

The ministers should not poll everything. They should seek for guidance, expose their future move and poll only the things where there is opposition. They would also be the one in charge of initiatives in their domain. the ministers will normaly change due to real life issues.

At CDZ, we were anarchist, but with a regular turnplayer. It went rather well except for some diplo chat where things where not always agreed in advance and polls where made with 15 persons online. I wasn't there in the beginning, so I do not know how things got into place.

I'm not too knowlegable with the concept of SG, but we must make sure here that we have a system where the diplomacy is effective, because, we may have the best devellopement, but if 2 civs are comming after us, we're dead.

 

[Daghdha]

I vote Anarchy coz ol punks die hard and because RL sometimes interfere with CIV assignements. If so I normally tend to RL first .
Sir Confuse-a-Lot (SW) would be a smasher as spokesman, but in a completely different way than Brother Bede would.
How do we wanna appear to our opponents? As distinguished micromanagers (Bede) or as Gung-Ho risktakers (SW). What will be most annoying for them to meet?

 

[Pentium]

What will be most annoying for them to meet?

A civ wit Knights when thay'll be researching Iron Working

 

[Mistfit]

I don't know if you guys want me voting on this kind of thing but I did anyway Guess what I agree with the Anarchy. I also agree that if the ranks grow to 20+ you might have to switch to democracy to avoid fights.

@Daghdha ~ I like your Avatar so I cleaned it up a bit to get rid of some of the white floaty things around him.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads10/Rodent_Improved.gif

 

[Crakie]

I voted democracy... a more structured way of going about things seems a good idea to me.

 

[Whomp]

We seem to be leaning towards an anarchist society. What may help the discussions would be a few categories that we could have stickied. Here are some I was thinking.

*Research
*MMing
*Military planning
*Turnplayer
*Diplomacy and scouting
*Espionage
*General discussion

Do you think it makes sense to organize it this way? Anything else?

 

[Pentium]

Me be research. Pleece!

 

[Mistfit]

Well I think that Pentium is out of the running for Head Spelling and Grammar Checker

 

[Darwin420]

(badly sung) "I... wanna beeeeee.... ANARCHY!!!!"

 

[Pentium]

You want a bee? Aren't 400 Billion Amphibians enough for you?

 

[Sir Bugsy]

Sex pistols Anarchy in the K.I.S.S.!!!

 

[Darwin420]

@Pentium... nope.. I need some air support for when I conquer the world , and, well, amphibians don't really fly too well... I mean, they can get good distance out of a catapult, but that doesn't help too much.

 

[Daghdha]

Do you think it makes sense to organize it this way?

Yes, organization seems sensible, we'll see about content...

 

[Own]

I think anarchy, whenever someone is playing and a midly important decision comes up, he can start a thread about it.

 

[Own]

We seem to be leaning towards an anarchist society. What may help the discussions would be a few categories that we could have stickied. Here are some I was thinking.

*Research
*MMing
*Military planning
*Turnplayer
*Diplomacy and scouting
*Espionage
*General discussion

Do you think it makes sense to organize it this way? Anything else?

I think it makes sense, cause afterall this is a demogame, not an SG. Whomp, will you start nomination thread for these positions? Then we can have a poll for each. Or does it work diffenetly? Me never been in a demogame.

I think we should have a MM commitee, of say 5 people.